My biggest fear — and it is a reasonable fear — is that the LeSage inquiry will be ignored the way a 2006 policy review was ignored.

Of the four score and one recommendations made by the LeSage inquiry into the eviction of Al Gosling, the most important may be these two:

Tenants, rejoice:

The office “will have as its focus the assurance that all eviction prevention policies are and have been engaged.”

Al Gosling lives. Or he would have, had this office been in place last year.

But don’t you think it’s a little weird that a public landlord such as TCHC needs an independent commissioner to make sure that it’s doing its primary job?

Never mind. If this recommendation is implemented, it will be a boon to the vulnerable, and . . . hang on a minute.

TCHC carried out a review of its eviction prevention policies in 2006; that review was led by Paul Dowling.

According to LeSage, the Dowling review noted that the eviction prevention policy a mere four years ago was characterized by: “1) lack of face-to-face contact; 2) inconsistent documentation; and 3) most repayment agreements were negotiated only after formal eviction proceedings begin.”

Sound familiar?

Dowling recommended that “1) all front-line staff should be trained in eviction prevention strategies; 2) written communications to tenants should be in plain language; 3) TCHC should no longer evict a tenant for persistent late payment of rent; and 4) TCHC should continuously monitor eviction prevention performance.”

There’s more.

LeSage notes, “The Dowling study found some evidence that some TCHC staff think of tenants in arrears as engaging in morally suspect behaviour.”

You get the picture.

And then LeSage adds — and this fairly screams off the page — “Many of the problems addressed in the Dowling report are still problems today.”

Roll that around in your mind for a moment: the public landlord paid for an assessment into its treatment of vulnerable tenants four years ago, BUT IT DID NOT ACT ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

Had TCHC paid attention to Dowling, you might conclude that Al Gosling would not have been evicted. Had Al not been evicted, he might be alive today.

Forget staff for a moment — does the board of TCHC not know what the hell is going on? Is this not negligence high and low?

I am spitting mad.

Heads ought to roll. Resignations ought to be offered. The TCHC board meets at the end of the month.

We’ll see what happens then.

My biggest fear — and it is a reasonable fear — is that LeSage will be ignored the way Dowling was ignored.

At Al’s memorial service last fall, a woman showed up to say that her mother shops at a downtown supermarket, and she recognized Al’s picture in the paper. She said Al had the habit of getting a cup of coffee and a copy of this paper; after he finished reading, he would carefully tear each page into little strips before tossing them in the recycling bin.

I feel like that some days myself.

Now I have sad news:

After his death, Al’s body was offered to one of the hospitals for research; it turns out the hospital declined.

Al rests in an unmarked grave.

I challenge TCHC to do the right thing, and find out where he is buried, and provide a proper headstone. I further suggest that, in addition to the usual information, the headstone read:

More on thestar.com

We value respectful and thoughtful discussion. Readers are encouraged to flag comments that fail to meet the standards outlined in our
Community Code of Conduct.
For further information, including our legal guidelines, please see our full website
Terms and Conditions.